Forum:Namespace
Okay, so I tried to explain this concept on another Forum Topic (Here: Forum:Removing Article Prefix) but I either failed to correctly convey my meaning... Or I was arguing the wrong point and wasn't being clear enough of my intentions. Because of the size of this message, I have created a second Forum article, rather than clutter the bottom of that page. 20:44, August 26, 2011 (UTC) Namespaces (their purpose / correct use / how to fix) Currently This Wikia has the Namespaces "Clan:" and "Union:" which precede the majority of our articles. As is clearly stated in When to create namespaces, this is not a good practice as it is contrary to general practice and increases general confusion: Because the two namespaces display in the respective title for any article they are in, the name spaces are actually known as a "Namespace Prefix." For clarification on anything regaring Namespaces, read here: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Namespace. I am proposing, for multiple reasons, that we as a community do 1 of 3 things: #Revert the current practice of placing namescape prefixs before an article title. This only serves to confuse new editors to the wikia who practice standard editing procedures. Edit all current existing articles, as quickly as possible in a community initiative, in such a manner that corrects all article titles to accurately convey the policy change #Revert the current practice of placing namescape prefixs before an article title. . Edit all current existing articles, as each article is visited, until all articles are eventually reverted to proper namescape stance and meet updated wiki policy. #'Create a Custom Namescape for this wikia', which correctly displays all clan and union articles as they should display, and helps to better organize the wiki. How to do #3 you ask? This page here explains it best: Using_custom_namespaces. The benefit of creating the custom namespaces would be: *Clan wiki organization *Better readibility *Uniform Editing practices with majority of other Wikis *Ability to create functionality features for Clans and Unions (Like making subpages for unions that include the clans) *Community WOULD NOT need to remove the prefixs to decrease the clutter of wiki The Problem With creating Custom namespaces: *We cannot do it ourselves. *We would need to obtain Wikia Approval. *(Nothing Big) 20:44, August 26, 2011 (UTC) As it stands As it stands, I am intending to promote this wikia significantly in the coming future. My clan is one of the successful clans in runescape at the moment. I have access to the Clan Leader Forums where it is my intent to encourage all participants of that illustrious community to advocate this wiki's use. Lets be honest, there is no other runescape fansite that is 100% dedicated to the clan community of runescape (Runehead perhaps, but it is not often updated and has fallen to the wayside with the clan database on runescape.com). There is no reason that all the clans of runescape should not use this wiki. Most runescape players are in a clan, this would seem to suggest most runescape players have something to use the runescapeclans wiki for something, correct? The responses I get from clan leader in the CLF incude: *Community isn't very friendly to new editors. **(We need to work on RuneScape Clans Wiki:All editors are equal.) **(We need to work on RuneScape Clans Wiki:Assume good faith.) **On the previous article our only bureaucrat Zerouh said "... Not only would it, as several significant individuals here pointed out, take immense effort and time to change this but it makes it harder in the long run and prevents clarification to users of all varieties." I am sure everyone who reads this can see how a new or semi-new editor could see this as placing some editors above others. **The Original Suggestion Here, recieved primarily negative support. "I don't think we should do this. It's more descriptive and makes all the articles on here more equal IMO." -Arnold Ogamon (isn't the point of this wikia to display everything fairly and make all clans appear equal?) **...Cough..Cough... **"This is impractical to remove the "Clan:" and/or "Union:" namespace from over 500 pages because one user is unable to reform to the normal order of business on the Wiki" -Host JD (If one user is correct, isn't that a validation?) **(As a community, we are very closed minded to new people and difficult ideas.) *The Policies of the wikia differ from any other I have edited on. **(Just look at the number of Articles in this wikia which do not follow our own wiki's policy: Neutral point of view.) **I personally have had edits reverted because the reason I posted for my edits was "Blatant advertising and lack of Neutral Perspective" and been told in response that the wikia is for advertising. **Things like the Namspaces (which is what this whole Forum Article is about) are also included in this issue.) *Most of the Clans in that wiki are dead anyway... **(There needs to be serious review of the Deletion policy & Speedy deletion policy.) **The fact that much of runescape's community views this database as outdated is a mark on our ability to clean house. **We could fix this in simple ways, even if its just that we begin to use the } template with more regularity.) *The quality of most articles is "lacking". **(as was said on my Talk page by MinigameGod: **My point is, let us check EVERY PAGE. We can do it.If the wiki policies coincide with every other wiki outside this one, perhaps we will find more editors joining our community to assist. **(We may not be able to manage this wiki with one bureaucrat(who no longer plays runescape) Two admins (One who isn't currently in a clan.) and an additional 22 other editors (Many of which are designated retired). Fine, lets get fresh meat. ) *The Editors aren't in clans and don't play runescape. **(See last comments of above.) I cannot break this image that the Clan Leader Forums (CLF) or Runescape Community have by myself (though I am going to try.) They may think as I said above, I am not content to allow them to continute thinking that! I intend to edit out sections which do not meet the requirments outlined here:RuneScape Clans Wiki is not... and delete the ones that cannot be fixed. I Intend to follow the primary goal as it has been outlined here: RuneScape Clans Wiki:About. I would like to fix the prefixes while I do this '''... I could argue this wiki's rules allow me to: Simplified ruleset/ Rule 3. But I understand that a community cannot act solely on a single individual's opinion. Even if I tried, Some silly chap would come in and revert all of my edits, regardless of the quality or quantity of the edits. So I am asking you all now, help me help us. I want to make our wiki the best it can be. In doing so, perhaps I can encourage others in the clan community to join our group. With their help we can make this wiki, "The Runescape Clans Wiki," as dominate a community as it should be. 20:44, August 26, 2011 (UTC) Category:Forums Discussion '''Oppose: This wiki has been documenting and creating an ever-expanding clan database, successfully for a number of years. From what I understand, there has been no confusion towards the way we use the namespace feature. It has been an easy, and simplistic way of categorizing our clan, union and article pages and I don't see any reason why this needs to change. Yes, it may not be the way that the MediaWiki wants this feature to be used, but it works, and there is no hazard to the continuation of using it the way we do. In my personal opinion, removing all the namespaces would create confusion with users of any kind: Unless you scrolled down to the very bottom of the page, you wouldn't know whether the page was a clan or union or article. It's as basic as, why would we remove something that has been working successfully for years? 07:05, August 27, 2011 (UTC) *'From what I understand, there has been no confusion towards the way we use the namespace feature.' I could argue this point until my fingers fell off. I doubt either of us could convince the other. You have used this wiki for a year+. In that time, how many articles have been created, then a community editor came in and edited the article title? I am willing to say over 50% of articles on this wiki fit into that category. 16:50, August 27, 2011 (UTC) *'Yes, it may not be the way that the MediaWiki wants this feature to be used, but it works, and there is no hazard to the continuation of using it the way we do.' The problem however is not in that it works, it does! BUT, every new editor who attempts to add content to this wiki must adjust from standard wiki editing protocol and adapt to this Uniquely obscure system. I don't know many people willing to do that. That's why our community is listed as 25 people... 16:50, August 27, 2011 (UTC) *'In my personal opinion, removing all the namespaces would create confusion with users of any kind: Unless you scrolled down to the very bottom of the page, you wouldn't know whether the page was a clan or union or article. '''This sounds like a legitimate concern except for 3 things. (1) How many people randomly visit articles on this wiki? Personally I never visit random articles on any wiki. I type in what I am looking for, visit the article, and obtain more information on the subject I am looking for. 90%+ of people reading articles in this wiki already know if the article is a clan/union. (2) Personally I have not visited any wikia or mediawiki or wikipedia that does not use the system I am suggesting. If you are implying that every reader who reads those MILLIONS of articles of content on all the thousands of different wikis, and that the system we use here is more or less confusing... I might start giggling.... (3) I personally have not read an article on THIS wiki, which did not provide a brief summary paragraph at the beginning of the article, and which did not quickly designate the articles purpose, be it providing information on a clan, union, or other. 16:50, August 27, 2011 (UTC) *'It's as basic as, why would we remove something that has been working successfully for years?' Please refer to my response to Arnold Ogamon. 16:50, August 27, 2011 (UTC) '''Undecided- '''Option three seems pragmatic if any change were to occur, however, MinigameGod brings up a valid point that this system has seemed to work for many years. I will cast my vote once I hear more from each side. 13:46, August 27, 2011 (UTC) *I appreciate your support for option three. The primary issue (as stated above) is that Wikia does not allow edits to the programing script without their consent. This would require our Beurocrat (or admins- not 100% sure if they can contact wikia or not) to submit the suggested change for approval. I do think that it is the most practical of my suggestions. Going and editing 500+ pages is not my example for a "good time". I am willing to do it, and as was suggested on the past forum article, it would take one person doing 50 articles a day 10 days. Piece of Cake. If, however, we were able to implement the custom namespace suggestion, then not only would we appease all the supporters of retaining the namespace, but update our wiki to a more sifisticated system. 16:50, August 27, 2011 (UTC) '''Oppose:' I don't think we should, why fix what's not broken? [[User:Arnold Ogamon|'Arnold Ogamon']] Talk __ UT 15:53, August 27, 2011 (UTC) (I added oppose and moved your statement one tab left so I could respond in the Subspace. Hope you dont mind 16:50, August 27, 2011 (UTC) ) *The problem here is, I am arguing that it is broken. Lets look only at numbers. There are over ~5000 Clans which have 10 or more members. There are an additional 10,000+ clans listed on the official Clan Database. Runehead has over 5,000 clan rosters, some not up to date, but all existing at one point or another. Our wiki (which is marketing itself as the Runescape Clan Community's Wiki, has only 1,000 articles. If you take out all the stubs and articles that meet speedy deletion requirements, we are down to 800? Then lets remove all the articles that are sub-articles for clans and unions. If we look at your triumvirate (for example) How many articles do you have? The number of legitimate clans that are represented in this wiki is SIGNIFICANTLY lower than the number of clans that exist. The accuracy of our wiki is therefor disuputable. Why don't the additional Clans use this wiki, because they feel the policies are too different from convention, and the lack of consitant enforcement for RSC:NPOV. Cheif among the policy issues is the namescape. HOw many clans create an article, imput content leave- An admin logs in, changes the name of the article against the clan editor's choice, and goes about there business- then the original editor returns to find that their title was changed to include a namespave without anyone telling them. I know AT LEAST 20 clan leaders who have discussed this exact incident with me. Look at India, Inc. They made a page yesterday, and the same thing happened to them (I did it :( ). We have to keep in mind, as the community, we are comfortable with our system, BUT everyone else who trys to use it, follows standard conventions. 16:50, August 27, 2011 (UTC) *COntinuing with the numbers, lets look at some Jagex Statistics. According to Mod Timbo (the Head Clan Currator for Community Management) 83% of all runescape accounts are in a clan. 83%! So.... The runescape Wiki (our sister wiki) has thousands of editors. 83% of those editors are in a clan. Why then doesn't this wiki have 83% that our sister wiki does? Is it a marketing issue? Perhaps we aren't getting our name out enough? -Or- is it something about this wiki that is a turnoff? I don't know. But going off numbers only, something is wrong. 16:50, August 27, 2011 (UTC) *'Why fix what's not broken?' Thomas Edison was asked this about lightbulbs. Lanterns and Torches provide suitable light. So was Bell asked when he upgraded the Telegraph to a Telephone. HUmans walked for thousands of years. One day, some crazy bloke invented the wheel, made a chariot, and changed human transportation for thousands of years. The problem I am trying to explain (and the above examples may be slightly extreme) We are walking. Every other wiki is riding chariots. 16:50, August 27, 2011 (UTC) Comments- 'I agree with the arguments exposed, if the editing process is to different, it will scare away other editors that are not use to it. Tohtli 17:50, August 27, 2011 (UTC) Comment: I support the argument presented.MsKonnan10 20:01, August 27, 2011 (UTC) *I believe you would have to be completely ignorant to be confused by how the system works. If it's got "Clan" in front of the name, it's a clan. If it's got "Union" in front of the name, it's a union. It's as simple as that, and for a page editor, I don't find how changing their clan page to fit the system would anger or confuse them. Yea, there are a lot of pages that we change to fit the way we do things (i.e. Adding "Clan:"), but one look at all the other pages on the wiki and I'm sure that user would understand? I think it's quite self-explanatory. Users don't come to this wiki to read about their own clan? Users come here to find a clan. Saying 90% of users know what they are specifically looking for wouldn't be correct. Have you asked users of RS and the RSW why they don't choose to use the RCW? And, have they told you that it is because they use namepsaces in a different way? There are numerous reasons why people might not wish to use the wiki. I say the majority have just never heard of the wiki. I doubt that it is because the wiki uses namepsaces or that the editing style is different. By the way, how is this wiki so different, compared to the RSW? (excluding the way we use namepsaces) I don't see how it is, and how that may confuse, anger or scare away users. 00:27, August 28, 2011 (UTC) '''Oppose-' Per MinigameGod. 01:09, August 28, 2011 (UTC) *'''I believe you would have to be completely ignorant to be confused by how the system works. Please forgive me if I have implied editors are confused by the system. The multipl editors from RSW have said they think its stupid, but they aren't confused. The Clan Leaders of the CLF find it confusing, mainly due to their limited experience with wiki editing, but that is simply inexperience, not the system. *'If it's got "Clan" in front of the name, it's a clan. If it's got "Union" in front of the name, it's a union. It's as simple as that, and for a page editor, I don't find how changing their clan page to fit the system would anger or confuse them.' No, they just think its stupid, cluttered, and unnecessary. *'Yea, there are a lot of pages that we change to fit the way we do things (i.e. Adding "Clan:"), but one look at all the other pages on the wiki and I'm sure that user would understand?' I would agree with this statement if it weren't for the 50+ clan leaders I have discussed this with who have expressed annoyance on this EXACT issue. *'I think it's quite self-explanatory'. BUt you are familiar with it. So your opinion is skewed. I am posting this article here to express the observation- your perception of ease and comfort is strongly incorrect because of your level of experience. Just because you think it is self-explanatory does not mean it is. Sorry. *'Users don't come to this wiki to read about their own clan? Users come here to find a clan.' I would love to see some user data on this. Is there anyway for us to find daily site access? Check if visitors to the site are editors of a specific clan, etc? I will put it this was, I am allied to KOTA, whos founder and editor is Soldier 1033 (I assume you all know who that is). KOTA's current leader, Stargate 277, is one of my closest friends in RuneScape. The Knights of the Abyss are a feature clan, have links ALL OVER this wiki, and in its entire existance on this wiki, they have recruited 2 people. How many other people have been recruited here? I think that your perception of this is wrong, which may be the key variance in our opinions. I think that the majority of visitors to this site are in a clan, are writing a wiki for their clan, and look at other clans to get better knowlesge and find how to contact them. I think VERY little recruitment occurs, and even less of people visiting random pages where they don't have a pre-judgement about the articles purpose. *'Saying 90% of users know what they are specifically looking for wouldn't be correct'. Prove it. :P I think it is. That is how it is in every other wiki. *'Have you asked users of RS and the RSW why they don't choose to use the RCW? And, have they told you that it is because they use namepsaces in a different way? There are numerous reasons why people might not wish to use the wiki.' The below are the key reasons that I have heard. (Namespaces are one of the key policy issues. The second is the lack of enforcement for RSC:NPOV.) **Community isn't very friendly to new editors. **The Policies of the wikia differ from any other I have edited on. **Most of the Clans in that wiki are dead anyway... **The quality of most articles is "lacking". **The Editors aren't in clans and don't play runescape. *'I say the majority have just never heard of the wiki. I doubt that it is because the wiki uses namepsaces or that the editing style is different.' Given the lack of data on this subject I can not present any arguement. I think if it is eiter option you have presented, there is a problem, no? The best way to get people to hear about it: Involve clan leaders, have our community leaders be active in runescape and clans, etc.... The best way to get editors, encourage them doing the work. I Edited ~50 articles yesterday, I was chastised and told to not edit so much.... Tsk. *'By the way, how is this wiki so different, compared to the RSW? (excluding the way we use namepsaces) I don't see how it is, and how that may confuse, anger or scare away users.' Posseionary concepts of articles. Any editor should be able to edit any page. This is how Every wiki is constructed. To limit an editor by stating don't edit pages without the original authors concent is contrary to the basic principles of Wikia. If you read RuneScape Clans Wiki:About, it says in there to edit anything thats needed. I see in many instances this wiki forgets the rules outline in the simplified ruleset here: RuneScape Clans Wiki:Simplified ruleset. What is rule #1? ;) This wiki has a posseionary concept about it. People think they own and need to protect articles. We allow an article told in story mode or first person to exist. This wiki is not a blog. Articles ARE NOT allowed to be written in this manner. How is this wiki different? We allow that crap. RSW deletes it. BOLD 00:27, August 28, 2011 (UTC) Normal 03:10, August 28, 2011 (UTC) *I support this argument. I think the fact that most clans don't bother to use this wikia should be a sign, especially most valid clans. Clan: Wolfs Eye Daviddts 14:10, August 28, 2011 (UTC) 'Oppose -' Per MinigameGod and reasons stated on Forum:Removing Article Prefix. 15:22, August 28, 2011 (UTC) '''Silly, Silly, Silly - '''1. It is confusing. Perhaps it's not confusing to you. Any good wiki editor comes in and reads the rules, regarding objectivity, and then reads an article or two, and sees those rules ignored. They aren't sure what to do. Then they find all this clutter with namespaces and other weird stuff, and throw up their arms in despair, go to their clan offsite and rant about it. AND are never seen here again. 2. You have a guy in here, giving you a suggestion of how to make your wiki better. There is an overwhelming notion of "It's too much work." Well, if you don't want to do it right the second time, perhaps you shouldn't have let it gotten so bad to begin with. Shame on you. What percentage of the clans on here still exist? 40%? Find me another wiki, where 60% of their articles are completely out of date. It's like having a windows wiki, and only including information on Windows95. This is a result of poor wiki administration. 3. This is just a silly argument. Who cares? This is a dead wiki. You want to know why not enough people have heard of RCW? Because the people who run it, don't play runescape, or aren't in clans. AND the people who play runescape, and are in clans, wouldn't touch this wiki if they had to. Why were the people who are admins on this wiki chosen? It's like having admins for the Gears Of War2 Wiki, who have never played GOW2. Sure, they may have played the original Gears, but it is a totally different animal now.Rerecros 17:09, August 28, 2011 (UTC) '''Support: '''Having read the arguments, standardising the system and getting rid of namespaces seems like a good idea. Yes, the system works, but it could work better. More people using and/or editing will in turn lead to a more updated Wiki. It may be hard work, but it'll be worth it as the processes will feed into themselves (ease of access/use = more people, more people = more updates, more updates = more visitors etc) Vodka B I don't see a comment from me here, but I oppose this issue. 00:42, January 4, 2012 (UTC)